Placebo effects in the extreme

[bonzo75]

The text appears completely cogent to me.
Keith.

I always like anecdotal evidence cited by objectivists

 

[Jinjuku]

So, despite you claim that "honest objectivists" admit to the possible limitations of their measurements, you can't cite a previous example of this from you?
What were you saying about "intellectual humility"?

I don't have the plots any longer. And I understand you are asking about a specific scenario.

I have a pair of ~$260 MIT EXP2 speaker cables. I have a pair of Belden 5000UE speaker cables. With my Omni-mic V2 there was no change outside of 6 runs of the testing with either cable.

Please find a post of mine re: "possible limitations of their measurements".

 

[jkeny]

Anyone, objectivist or whatever trumpeting their own 'intellectual humility' has to be having us on and can't be taken at all seriously, I mean come on....

Yea, akin to someone claiming their honesty

 

[jkeny]

I don't have the plots any longer. And I understand you are asking about a specific scenario.

I have a pair of ~$260 MIT EXP2 speaker cables. I have a pair of Belden 5000UE speaker cables. With my Omni-mic V2 there was no change outside of 6 runs of the testing with either cable.

So we can conclude your claim is groundless "Sure they can. Done all the time. " to my question:
Should an "honest objectivist" not be capable of entertaining that their analysis/measurements are not necessarily the "truth" as far as auditory perception is concerned?

 

[opus112]

Right - its such basic psychology that 'He who knows, does not speak. He who speaks, does not know'. The most dishonest people on forums are the ones most often preaching about 'intellectual honesty'.

 

[jkeny]

What are you on about JK?

Obviously blind because I am sure you realise I wouldn't allow it to happen any other way.

None of the descriptions can be true because the re-recording will have damaged every aspect of the originals fidelity.

Yea so the self-regard you have for your "knowledge" & "intellectual honesty" refuse to admit that the listening results of the blind test are real - they all heard it as a perceptual improvement. Yet you claim this can't be true. You still don't see the cognitive dissonance on display here?

 

[jkeny]

The text appears completely cogent to me.
Keith.

Of course it does, Keith - I expected nothing different.

 

[Purite Audio]

I always like anecdotal evidence cited by objectivists

You should become an objectivist, it is really cool and there is a special handshake.
Keith

 

[BE718]

Yea so the self-regard you have for your "knowledge" & "intellectual honesty" refuse to admit that the listening results of the blind test are real - they all heard it as a perceptual improvement. Yet you claim this can't be true. You still don't see the cognitive dissonance on display here?

Eh??? Obviously re-recording cannot have improved the fidelity of the sound. They preferred an inferior copy. None of the described subjective improvements were possible. There is simply no cognitive dissonance.

The results of the blind test are absolutely real, ie a bunch of hifi enthusiasts preferred the sound of an inferior copy.

 

[jkeny]

Ok to the regen/ Intona. Interesting result there. First thing to note is that everyone struggled to hear a difference. When playing back from a laptop the final consensus was the Intona was better. When Playing back from the Aries people thought the regen was better.

Now this test could have been controlled better, next time I will do so, however this example just confirms my opinions regarding how flawed people's (including my own) subjective opinions can be..

This really is your considered conclusion from your little test?

 

[jkeny]

Eh??? Obviously re-recording cannot have improved the fidelity of the sound. They preferred an inferior copy. None of the described subjective improvements were possible. There is simply no cognitive dissonance.

You still don't see it - hilarious

 

[BE718]

This really is your considered conclusion from your little test?

Jk, are you upset this test didn't resolve in the way you would have hoped?

 

[BE718]

You still don't see it - hilarious

Yep, you have completely lost me.

 

[Jinjuku]

Anyone, objectivist or whatever trumpeting their own 'intellectual humility' has to be having us on and can't be taken at all seriously, I mean come on....

You may want to first consider that you don't understand the definition first. I'm willing to reassess what I know in the face of data. You are totally welcome to provide that data.

 

[jkeny]

Jk, are you upset this test didn't resolve in the way you would have hoped?

Nope, this is just another example of your failure to understand that this test doesn't show what your biased interpretation leads you to conclude. I'm sure you've heard of experimenter's error - your whole post is such a rich vein of learning material for those willing to learn

BE, I used the Socratic method with you before (In relation to my analysis of the Intona) & even though it inflames you & your sense of superiority over being taught anything by someone like me, you should work through your anecdote & your conclusions to learn about your cognitive dissonance.

 

[opus112]

You may want to first consider that you don't understand the definition first.

You have a definition for 'intellectual humility' that is 'being willing to reassess what you know in the face of data'? If so, does not sound like humility to me, which is based on what a person practices, not what they claim about themselves in my book.

I'm willing to reassess what I know in the face of data.

But that's just a claim. Making claims is dead easy. Especially on forums.

 

[Gregadd]

And measurements that are properly taken, documented, and reproducible are also open to contradiction if they are in error. Knock yourself out.
Measurement bias means your subjective impression is influenced by your knowledge of the measurements.
I'm always open to 360 degree critical feedback. I'm always willing to look at, assess, and modify my position, my understanding, my approach. But it's going to be data driven.
Good for you.
Again it's intellectual humility that I don't see with a great many of the Subjective folk.
At least they are being given credit for intelligence.That is not always the case. They will have to work on that humility thing.
At Polk Audio people were just going on and on and on about burned in cables. I offered to send out a set of unused and a set of burned in cables. Randomly labeled. For any ears on, 30 day, no test administrator, fully SIGHTED, any interval timing, # of swaps the participant desired, in their own home on their own setup.

$100 to charity.

No goal posts where changed out side of my initial offer. After 10 weeks of the thread just blowing up, but strangely no takers, I rescinded the offer. My point made and data collectedI commend their discipline. I am overwhelmingly opposed to accepting such challenges..

1

 

[GaryProtein]

Here is a pic , the central bar is exactly the same shade of grey but it does not appear so.. it appears as graduated

The truth matters very little .. what is the reality for most? their reality is that it is NOT the same colour , it will never appear the same shade .. no matter how many times it is proven to be the same shade , folk will swear it isnt.

99.9% of folk will see the shade gradations in the central bar... thats their reality...you will never shake them of that no matter how you prove it.

It's NOT their reality.

It is their PERCEPTION.

 

[jkeny]

It's NOT their reality.

It is their PERCEPTION.

It's the reality of how perception works
All of our perceptions are a filter through which we sense the "something" out there.
For most people this hobby uses the sense of auditory perception to connect with the "something" we call music.
The whole premise contained in your answer is that you can completely measure the "something" & tell how it will be perceived by auditory perception - an extraordinary claim that needs extraordinary proof

 

[Whatmore]

The other day some friends and I compared 3 DACS; a chord 2qute, a Resonessence Invicta and a bel canto.
Interesting thing was when I shut my eyes I could tell them apart every time, we all could.
But when I had my eyes open and knew which was which it was impossible to say that there was any audible difference !